COMAH COMPETENT AUTHORITY PROPOSALS FOR IMPLEMENTING
FINDINGS FROM THE FOCUS ON ENFORCEMENT REVIEW OF THE
CHEMICALS (COMAH) SECTOR
Overview
1. In response to the Focus on Enforcement Review of the chemicals
(COMAH1) sector, the COMAH Competent Authority (CA) has
proposed an ambitious programme to make further and significant
improvements to arrangements for regulating onshore major hazards
that aim to reduce unnecessary burdens on business whilst securing
the protection of people and the environment from major accidents.
2. The CA programme takes account the outcome of discussions at a
Ministerial meeting on 1 November 2012 that identified that the CA
needed to:
 enhance further the ‘single face’ of the CA to simplify and avoid
duplication of on-site regulatory activities;
 set out simply and clearly the principles, scope, interrelationships
and performance standards for cost recovery for both the COMAH
and environmental permitting (EPR) regimes;
 explore the role of accredited third parties in providing the
regulators with assurance over an operator’s ability to manage
major accident risks in a sustainable way, and how this would
influence inspection activities;
 improve the clarity of, and industry’s confidence in, the regulators’
appeal mechanisms, and explore how business could access a
‘second opinion’ in certain cases of disagreement;
 improve industry’s understanding of the implications of moving into
the COMAH regime to enable better-informed business decisions.
3. Ministers also agreed the opportunity to participate in the improvement
programme should be offered across all sectors covered by the
COMAH regime and across Great Britain, subject to the views of the
relevant authorities in Scotland and Wales.
4. The CA is also very aware of the impact that delays to Hazardous
Substances Consents and other planning decisions can have on
businesses. The Department for Communities and Local Government
is working with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the
Environment Agency (EA) – as statutory consultees to Local Planning
Authorities – and with industry and others to reduce the likelihood of
delays in planning and in obtaining Hazardous Substances Consents
through a number of ongoing activities. HSE and EA have also
published their improvement plans in response to the 2011 Autumn
Statement, the National Infrastructure Plan and the Penfold
Implementation Report.
1
Control of Major Accident Hazards
1
Outcomes
5. The CA’s action plan means that COMAH operators will:







see simplified and, where appropriate, reduced regulatory
interactions which avoid unnecessary duplication and overlap
between health, safety and environmental regulatory regimes;
have a single point of contact in the CA, and know what standards
of performance they can expect from the regulators;
better understand how the major accident and other hazards they
create and their performance in controlling major accident risks
influences the scale and depth of regulatory scrutiny they can
expect, and how they can provide the regulators with greater
assurance about their arrangements for managing and controlling
those risks;
have greater confidence in the CA’s cost recovery mechanisms for
its regulatory activities and better understand the interrelationships
between different approaches;
have greater confidence in the arrangements for challenging
regulatory and cost recovery decisions;
be able to make more informed decisions about operating within the
scope of the COMAH regime;
be involved in the development of any improvements in approach to
COMAH Safety Reports.
6. Ministers also supported the CA’s proposals for early and ongoing
engagement with industry on the proposed work programme. This will
also provide an opportunity to assess the costs and benefits of the
improvements along with industry’s capacity to engage with the CA in
what will be an ambitions programme of work for all involved.
7. The CA proposes bilateral meetings involving key chemical sector
trade associations that contributed to the evidence gathering stage of
the BRE Review. These meetings will assist in setting mutual
expectations and provide a direction for ongoing engagement.
8. Following clearance by the Reducing Regulation Committee (RRC) and
publication of the Review report and the CA’s response, the CA will
hold a ’high-level’ stakeholder event comprising a wider segment of
industry trade associations and duty holders in scope of the COMAH
regulations to agree the overall programme of improvements. Ministers
and BRE officials will be invited to attend.
9. The CA also sees this early engagement continuing in the longer term
at a strategic level and as a way of involving industry in the
transposition of the new Seveso III Directive.
10. The CA and Industry will provide an update on progress to the RRC 6
months into the implementation programme.
2
ACTION PLAN AND TABLE
The CA proposes to:
1. Meet with industry representatives of the chemicals sector by the end of
January 2013 to:
i. Achieve a common understanding of how the improvements to the
regime will meet their concerns;
ii. Commence discussions on specific topics, i.e. the ‘single face’ of the
CA, improving the transparency of cost recovery and appeal
mechanisms, and the role of third party verification;
iii. Agree the CA’s final improvement programme, and secure industry’s
participation in its delivery; and
iv. Agree the arrangements for ongoing engagement with the chemicals
sector and other COMAH operators, including establishing the
proposed COMAH Strategic Forum that will also provide a
mechanism to engage industry on the transposition and
implementation of the new Seveso III Directive.
2. Work with industry to develop proposals by May 2013 that further simplify,
and where appropriate, reduce interactions with business, eliminate any
duplication and overlap between health, safety and environmental
regulatory regimes, and enhance how the CA acts with a single voice
when dealing with business. This will involve:
i. Exploring how and in what circumstances health, safety and
environmental inspections at lower-risk COMAH establishments can
be conducted by just one of the CA partner organisations. The CA will
otherwise improve its targeting at higher-risk sites;
ii. From April 2013, appointing a single Account Manager with oversight
for COMAH and environmental permitting (EPR) site-related
regulatory activity at a COMAH site to provide a single interface for
such safety, health and environmental regulatory activities. This will
be a phased approach starting with Top tier Sites followed by Lower
Tier sites;
iii.
Integrating the planning and delivery of Environmental Permitting
(EPR) regulation at COMAH sites within existing CA arrangements
for prioritisation and planning by April 2014 so that operators receive
a single annual intervention plan for all proactive health, safety and
environmental regulation; and
iv. Adopting the necessary governance arrangements in the CA
Strategic Management Group (CASMG) to deliver these proposals.
3. Work with industry to publish by March 2013 simple, easy-to-understand
guides, either separately or as part of a ‘Joint charging book’, that set out
for COMAH operators:
3
i. the CA‘s performance standards on service delivery and what
industry can expect from the CA, as well as how operators can assist
with the delivery of the regulatory regime;
ii. how industry can challenge the content, approach to delivery, or
outcomes of the CA’s regulatory activity, including how they can
obtain a second opinion on certain regulatory decisions;
iii. how the regulators determine and recover the costs for the COMAH
and EPR regulatory activities and the interrelationships between
different approaches, and arrangements for challenging cost recovery
decisions;
iv. the mechanisms for, and implications of, moving into and out of the
COMAH regime to enable operators to make informed business
decision;
v. the CA will send guide(s) to operators with 2013-14 Intervention
Plans in March 2013, and from January 2013 provide information with
CA invoices on how to challenge costs; and
vi. the CA will publish anonymised data quarterly from January 2013, on
the numbers and outcomes of such appeals to provide assurance
that industry’s concerns are taken seriously and acted upon.
4. Improve the clarity of how regulatory effort is determined and targeted and
provide a clear link between an establishment’s major accident hazard
potential and performance and the frequency and depth of inspections. To
achieve this the CA will:
i. Continue working with industry to develop a common framework for
determining sector performance in controlling major accident risk;
ii. Work with industry and accreditation bodies (e.g. UKAS) to examine
how third party verification could give the regulators the necessary
evidence and sustained assurance over operators’ management of
major accident risks and how this would influence the CA’s inspection
planning; and
iii. In the meantime, ’road-test’ an improved methodology that sets out
the key characteristics that determine levels of inspection and apply it
to intervention planning during 2013/14.
5. Establish by March 2013 a Safety Report Working Group, with
representation from industry aimed at exploring in more detail their
concerns about the value of the COMAH Safety Report process. The
Group will explore the evidence for changing the regulatory approach and,
if necessary, recommend by October 2013 process and legislative
changes to be taken forward as part of the Seveso III implementation.
4
FOCUS ON ENFORCEMENT REVIEW OF THE CHEMICALS (COMAH) SECTOR – ACTION TABLE
Plan Reference
Action Description
Completion Date
1. Engagement with Industry
(i)
Hold bilateral discussions with key trade associations about these improvements.
28 February 2013
(ii)
Hold a summit with industry to agree fine detail of the reform proposals to ensure it is best
tailored to industry needs
28 February 2013
(iii)
Agree arrangements for ongoing strategic engagement; including the creation of a Strategic
Forum.
28 February 2013
2. Single Face (voice) of the CA
(i)
Explore how inspections at lower risk COMAH establishments can be conducted by just one of
the CA partner organisations.
October 2013
(ii)
Establish CA Account Managers
From April 2013
(iii)
Integrate the planning and delivery of Environmental Permitting (EPR) and COMAH regulation
at COMAH sites.
By April 2014
(iv)
Adopt the necessary governance arrangements in the CA Strategic Management Group to
deliver these proposals;
April 2013
3. Clarifying cost recovery and performance standards and appeals mechanisms
(i)
Publish a simple ‘what you can expect’ guides for COMAH operators
March 2013
(ii)
Provide the guide with the 2013-14 Intervention Plans in March 2013, and provide information
with CA invoices on how to challenge costs.
March 2013
(iii)
Set out how industry can challenge the content, approach to delivery, or outcomes of the CA’s
regulatory activity (including how they can obtain a second opinion on certain regulatory
March 2013
5
decisions).
(iv)
Set out how regulators determine and recover the costs for COMAH and EPR regulatory
activities (Joint charging book); and arrangements for challenging cost recovery decisions.
March 2013
(v)
Publish quarterly anonymised data on the numbers and outcomes of cost-recovery appeals.
From January
2013
(vi)
Discuss with industry how we can improve their understanding of the consequences of moving
into COMAH (Cliff-edge effect).
28 February 2013
4. Recognition and performance
(ii)
With industry, develop a common framework for determining sector performance.
From April 2013
(ii)
Discuss earned recognition with industry prior to discussions with accreditation bodies (e.g.
UKAS).
28 February 2013
(iii)
Road test and publish by April 2013 a methodology that determine levels of inspection and
apply it to intervention planning during 2013/14.
From April 2013
5. Review of safety report assessment
(i)
Establish a Safety Report Working Group.
Mar 2013
(ii)
SR WG to identify any improvements to then form part of the CA’s programme to implement
the Seveso III Directive.
By Oct 2013
6